Re: PATCH - raise max_anon limit

[Jamie Lokier]

Tim Hockin wrote:
> > The rational for avoiding immediate reuse of id values is to catch
> > application errors.   Consider:
> > 
> > 	fd1 = open_like_call(...);
> > 	read(fd1,...);
> > 	close(fd1);
> > 	fd2 = open_like_call(...);
> > 	write(fd1...);
> > 
> > If fd2 has a different value than the recently closed fd1, the
> > error is detected immediately.
> 
> Is that really worth working around in such a gross way?  No offense to the
> idea, but that's a pretty dumb bug to be hacking a failsafe for :)

I'm pretty sure POSIX requires fd2 to be equal to fd1 if it is the
lowest free file descriptor number.

Unfortunately.  An O(1) fd allocation algorithm would be nice.

-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/